Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Patpettit/Archive

Evidence submitted by Hasteur
Revision history at Jim ragonese leads me to believe that the 2 accounts are acting in sock or meat puppetry. In addition IP address's involvement also seems suspicious. Hasteur (talk) 14:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Dropped SPI Notices on all 3 affected user's talk pages as procedure dictates. Hasteur (talk) 16:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Response to Clerk comment I believe that the 2 users are 100% sock puppetry, however the IP address is a marginal based on the general behavior. I'm aware that one of the users has been indeffed, but the investigation is so that we can cement a definite link. Hasteur (talk) 18:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly, that's why it's only a comment. -- DQ  (t)  (e)  19:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Did a CU ever get performed on the users? Hasteur (talk) 12:05, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No, with both accounts blocked, I felt that should take care of it. TN X Man  13:22, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * User already indef blocked for non sock reasons. -- DQ.alt (t)  (e)   17:58, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Both accounts already blocked, so I'll mark for close. TN X Man  11:40, 1 October 2010 (UTC)